22nd Anniversary of the National Development Strategy

Jan 25, 2022 Letters

Dear Editor,

Kaieteur News – 2022 marks 22 years since the National Development Strategy (NDS) instituted: ‘Shared Development Through a Participatory Economy.’ was launched under the PPP/C administration.

The NDS’ 22nd anniversary comes at a time when a ‘landmark development plan,’ as distinct from a strategy, is being designed currently by a team led by a Harvard University Professor.
This is not the first time Guyana has solicited external assistance to help design a development plan. The PNC’s first ‘New Road’, post-independence 7-year development plan (1966-1972) concentrated on infrastructure and reserved industrialization for the private sector. The plan was based on the ‘Puerto Rican Model’ that envisaged the creation of an investment climate with incentives to foreign capital. The project collapsed prematurely in 1969.

The second PNC development plan (1972-1976) with emphasis on a programme to ‘Feed, House and Clothe the Nation’ also failed. It was based on import-substitution, industrialisation, land reform, regional integration and partnership with foreign capital. That plan also failed. And the third PNC development plan (1978-1981) was aimed at providing ‘free milk and cassava’ and a promise that ‘not a man would go to bed hungry. ’ According to Cheddi Jagan; ‘The plan only helped accentuate the debt burden without any agricultural growth’. That Guyana experienced ‘Growth Without Development’ became the defining character of another PNC failed plan.

In all three undertakings, the Burnham administration was assisted by economic advisers including; Dr. R.W. Davenport, Dr. Wilfred David and Sir Arthur Lewis.
And in the late 1980’s to mid-1990’s Dr. Kenneth King’s expertise was employed to help prop-up an ailing economy.

The three development plans failed because of rampant racial and political discrimination, squander-mania and corruption. Above all, the root-cause of the plans’ failure was due to the regime’s interest in designing development models that proved unsuitable for Guyana.

In 1993, following the PPP/C’s assumption to office in 1992, then President Cheddi Jagan sought the assistance of the Carter Center to help draw up a National Development Strategy (NDS).
Three years later, in 1996, the first draft of the Strategy was completed, and published.
Its launch was considered ‘a landmark achievement for the government and people of Guyana.’

At the launch, then President Cheddi Jagan had prophesied that; “If properly implemented, the Strategy would create more opportunities for every Guyanese and translate their dreams and visions into reality.”

The records show that the first draft of the Strategy was never laid in the National Assembly, the PNC rejected the Strategy on the ground that the PPP/C would use it to bolster its 1997 election campaign. It called for the Strategy to be shelved. Following the PPP/C’s second election victory, and with transformative changes already evident in the economy, a revised Strategy became imperative. By the end of 1999, a second final draft had emerged.

What was significant for both the first and the second final draft of the revised Strategy was the broad civil society representation in the National Development Strategy Committee (NDSC) that was assembled to craft the Strategies. The NDSC’s task was not to simply update the first draft but to revisit its thrust and substance from a philosophical and strategic perspective and to introduce new chapters while retaining those that were considered relevant and applicable to the new conditions.
The new chapters included governance, the family and social information technology.

It was the first successful initiative in the country’s contemporary history in which civil society was so intrinsically involved in formulating an NDS.
At the political level, through the formation of disparate groups, civil society had played a pivotal role from the mid 1980’s to early 1990’s in the struggle for free and fair elections and the restoration of democracy. But with the NDS, Guyanese witnessed the most profound involvement of civil society, in a structured, organized and coordinated manner. Unlike during the March-August 2020 period when civil society did play independent and separate but defining roles in thwarting efforts by the APNU/AFC to frustrate the will of the electorate.

To re-write what was to emerge as the second final draft of the Strategy, civil society representatives assumed responsibility for leading, coordinating and managing the drafting process in consultation with the then Minister of Finance Bharat Jagdeo.

Sectoral committees were established to revise all the chapters contained in the first NDS draft of 1996. According to the second final draft; ‘Every race, every religion, every political party, every economic sector, and every ideological persuasion was represented either in the NDSC and/or the sectoral committees.’

The objectives of the Strategy were: ‘1) The attainment of the highest rates of economic growth that are possible by the year 2010; 2) the alleviation of poverty; 3) the attainment of geographical unity; 4) the equitable distribution of economic activity, and 5) the diversification of the economy.’

To attain these targets, the Strategy envisioned certain conditions being in place: ‘a) a greater degree of political inclusivity in the governance of the country; b) a higher degree of productivity and c) a re-examination of the education system.’

It was emphasized that; ‘The Strategy is not an economic development plan in the conventional sense of the term. If accepted the Strategy can be converted into programmes and projects which would then be coasted, some for financing by the public sector and others by private enterprise.’
It is not my intention to enter into an excursion in respect to the achievements and non-achievements of the Strategy however, twenty-two years later, a general assessment of the Strategy’s implementation would suffice.

What was unprecedented and of great significance however,
was the high degree of citizen participation and inclusiveness aimed at hammering out a long-range and a more directional journey rather than the near-term specifics found in a plan.
This experience begs the question whether such an engagement between governments and civil society is ever possible in the foreseeable future.

Implementation of the Strategy envisaged significant developments country-wide with the realization of: ‘an all-weather road to Lethem, improved interior road network, hydroelectricity, improved health care, establishment of an Amerindian Development Fund, Georgetown and other urban areas to have Green Belts, improved electricity generation and growth in population.’

Rebuilding infrastructure was realized with the upgrading on the Cheddi Jagan International airport at Timehri; the construction of Berbice Bridge; the East Bank Highway; interior all-weather roads network; the National Stadium; the Leonora synthetic track, the national Aquatic Center, the upgrade of the Ogle airport to an international airport; the Arthur Chung International Conference Centre; the West Coast Highway, the Anna Regina and Port Mourant markets and housing schemes at Eccles, Providence, Diamond and Parfait Harmony, paved roads at Lethem and Mahdia; the bridge over the Takatu River; the New Amsterdam to Moleson Creek and a network of farm to market roads.

The public sector was made more efficient in the management of government business through, public service reform; the public sector investment programme (PSIP); passage of procurement and fiscal management laws in 2003; the creation of the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) and continuation of government’s efforts to modernize the institutional framework.

In respect to the private sector being the engine of growth, the Small Business Bureau provided millions as start-up funds or ‘seed money’ for the growth and development of small and medium size enterprises.
The establishment of ‘Go Invest’ helped facilitate greater public/private enterprise investments with the construction of industrial estates at Eccles, Ruimveldt in Region 4, Belvedere in Region 6 and Lethem in Region 9.

In respect to Guyana ‘breaking out of the category of an ‘undeveloped nation,’ it is to be recalled that in 2016, one year earlier than the Strategy had anticipated, the World Bank recategorized Guyana from a lower middle-income country to an upper middle-income country.

The country’s recategorization notwithstanding, the point must be made that income alone is not an accurate determinant of the multi-dimensionality of development. While Guyana’s economy is on the cusp of transformative developments, it remains vulnerable and insufficiently diversified with topographical challenges as well as those related to climate change.

According to the Strategy, Berbice was expected to ‘become another industrial growth pole around the planned deep water harbour.’ While a deep water harbour is yet to be realized, with the announcement that a number of bids have been received to conduct a feasibility study and to secure a preliminary design for the construction of a bridge across the Corentyne River the prospects are even greater for Berbice to become the much anticipated industrial growth pole.

In its 1997 manifesto, the PPP/C had committed that it will ‘give a high priority to the completion of the Strategy in order to create a sound comprehensive approach to the total development of our nation.’ And in its 2001 manifesto the party informed that ‘The PPP/C administration has begun implementing key elements of the Strategy. It only makes sense, therefore, that our manifesto and agenda for the future development of Guyana should be anchored in the NDS abs the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper.’

In its 2011 manifesto it was stated that ‘the PPP/C’s strategies have evolved with the passage of time and with the benefit of progressive implementation. These strategies were the subject of extensive nationwide consultative process, and enjoy strong stakeholder ownership.’

The Strategies include the National Development Strategy, the Poverty Reduction, the National Competitiveness Strategy, and the Low Carbon Development Strategy.’ These Strategies we were told, ‘will continue to benefit from implementation in the next PPP/C administration providing policy continuity and predictability’.

While the National Competitiveness Strategy focused primarily on those areas that would improve the competitiveness of Guyana’s industries and businesses,
the Low Carbon Development Strategy focused on renewables energy, Amerindian development, digital development, climate resilience inter-alia.

Guyana has come a long way having wrestled for decades with a number of development plans and strategies in its search for sustainable development and people-centered economic growth.
The PPP/C government has now embarked on designing another development plan, again with external assistance.
This plan is being designed in a complete new era nationally and internationally. Guyanese expect that this time around their hopes and aspirations will be further advanced to the utmost.

Yours faithfully
Clement J. Rohee